Not all useful apps are hundreds of megs in size. Without knowing anything about the apps our company produces, or what they do, it is rather arrogant to presume anything about their usefulness. And from what I've been told (as I'm not the developer), the total image and icon size is in the megabyte, not kilobyte, range. I'd assume much more of that space is having to include images for every supported model and screen resolution rather then the icons. I chose the icon sizes above as an example just to show how seemingly arbitrary Apple is about changing everything from one model to the next. Why in the world go to a 58x58 icon when there is a 57x57 icon available? Is that extra 115 pixels going to make the app all that much more beautiful? Is it worth the extra work, times every single iOS developer in the world, to gain those 115 pixels? How many millions of man-hours of productivity world wide have been wasted recreating icon and image sets to deal with each and every change iOS makes to their screen? Large shops with hundreds of developers probably don't notice or care, but smaller developers certainly do.

> The high-resolution image assets that developers are required to add also contributes to the size of an app. -- This. Having to provide icons at 57x57 and 58x58, just for two examples out of dozens, is asinine. Our app code is dwarfed by the image collection size just to provide the minimum number of icons and load screens required.

Ubuntu + KDE = Kubuntu, Ubuntu + Xfce = Xubuntu. I run most of my laptops with Xubuntu, as it is much lighter weight resource-wise than full Ubuntu.

HP LaserJet III - Can't seem to kill it. Slow, by today's standards, but still prints like a champ. It's at home or I'd pull up the page stats. I think its over 1,000,000 prints, as it was used at the office for at least 15 years before they retired it (couldn't get a parallel port to run it off of easily) and I brought it home. HP 28C - While not everyone's favorite HP calculator, my 28C was purchased when I was a freshman in college in 1985, and still used daily. As a matter of fact, I think it's only on it's fourth or fifth set of batteries. They just never die.

In addition to the modem control signals, USB adapters also really mess up the timing of the signals. Some RS-232 hardware does not use any flow control, and relies on character timeouts to detect end of message. USB ports packetize the data, and can break up the packets in unpredictable places, so that delays can appear in the message, causing the other side to detect an end of message too soon. Also, some equipment uses the control lines such as RTS/CTS, DSR/DTR, RI, and DCD for I/O purposes. In DOS, it wasn't that hard to get somewhat decent timing to create and/or detect signals of specific duration with these pins, using them as essentially free digital I/O. With a USB to serial adapter, especially under Windows, it is nearly impossible to get any precision timing. Add to that another layer of VM, and it just gets worse. How bad this is really depends on the chipset and drivers. I've had more luck with PL2303 based devices than FTDI along these lines, but for some applications, USB to serial just won't work.

Well, the meanings of words change, anyway, but not always for the best. At best, I would have called this a biomechanical cat, not a bionic one, but I'm in my 40's, so new uses of old terms bothers me more than some.

Bionic = Biological + Electronic. Where's the electronic part of all this?